Even if that were true, that Apple might accelerate attempted government overreach by encrypting data end to end, the obvious better solution would be to hold t

Even if that were true, that Apple might accelerate attempted government overreach by encrypting data end to end, the obvious better solution would be to hold the line on the status quo for as long as possible (including legally duking it out with governments around the world to hold the line to the extent they can), not to do what they're doing now. If they were badly losing on that front (such that all hope were lost so to speak), then they could attempt this new approach at that time, they could offer that up as a middle ground, and their seeming capitulation then would buy them a lot of slack. Instead, they're supposedly pre-capitulating (if you buy into that premise). Doing what they're doing now, it looks like one of a few possibilities: they're just that stupid (I'm skeptical), they're groveling for points (hey, if we give you this, maybe you'll leave us alone on anti-trust, as our size and quasi-monopolistic position is beneficial to your surveillance aims), or they're already being compelled (as they were with PRISM) and are not publicly able to reveal that.